Gender Issue Discussion

@ Serious: to be hones that bugs me too. Model skinny is unhealthy and obese is unhealthy - unhealthy should not be present as beauty nor encouraged as a life choice or "accept me as I am". On the guy side, besides the lack of attractiveness of a walking muscle bundle, I hate how primal brute force is being proposed as a desirable trait when it has little to no place in our society. "Must be powerful so big muscles rawr" is just so lame. You only need one click to lift the and down the banhammer, what's that musclemass gonna do for you besides eat nutrients your brain needed?

There are legit reasons to build up muscle, although certainly not to bodybuilder extents. However both men and women will do better from a health perspective if they lift weights and build *some* muscle. It has positive metabolic consequences among quite a few other benefits. On bodybuilders:

Spoiler:

Bodybuilders take it to an extreme, although experienced ones know a surprising amount about health and nutrition. When I was researching about various thyroid medication options and their potential impact, I was a bit surprised to come across discussion of Diiodothyronine (T2) on a bodybuilder forum. It is popular belief in the medical community that only T3 and T4 are active, and that it is effective to give patients only T4...a belief that conflicts with literature. Interestingly, the bodybuilders *did* find literal medical journal articals supporting the impact of T2 on metabolism. They did something I would not do (IE turn into human guinea pigs) and take the stuff, and I even got to read some anecdotal discussion on which hormones were TSH-suppressive and whether people recovered after stopping. Fascinating, because actual research on that is scant.

Being a thyroid patient myself and thus having a very good reason to be interested in these hormones for basic dailly, I combined that anecdotal evidence + tons more + a very powerful double-blinded, randomized crossover study as justification for switching medications, and have seen considerable success in doing so (lost 10 pounds just from switching - I gained weight when I started on them, eating same #calories in both cases).

As a result, I can appreciate what they've done, providing a unique perspective for me by experimenting on themselves .

I think serious was referring to physical toughness with women vs men, IE "Can take more bludgeoning force and do more". That's a simple reality. Pain tolerance is another issue, and it varies by individual. Needless to say, I get tired of hearing women say "men don't know pain because they don't bear children" though. There are things (hemerrhoids, kidney stones, severe/mass burns) that are *not* unique to women and can easily hurt as much (or more, if medication is involved in one case but not the other). Having gone through a football practice many years ago while passing kidney stones, I know a thing or two about pain . Unfortunately, I don't think I'm ever going to forget that experience as long as I'm sane.

Society unfortunately has the ability to easily influence a child's mindset, and often negatively. We have scant evidence in many cases in terms of what kinds of shows ultimately have a positive or negative influence on a person's development. Things like spongebob are even arguably harmful; sure there isn't "using sexuality", but in turn it's commonly showing direspect and harmful behavior towards one's friends, not to mention glorifying stupidity. I say this, but I'm responsible for my nephews knowing how to play Gears of War X_X.

I often wonder at sheer social tendencies too. There are lots of activities that tend to be primarily female or male that have no apparent reason to be either. I have occasionally wondered what would happen if society simply trained gender roles in a reversed fashion for a generation, globally. I truly think you'd see "emotional" men with "traditional female roles" in that generation, and women who would refuse to cry regardless of how they felt (I've seen examples of both happening and the results already). People aren't that different I'd guess. It's truly amazing what conditioning can do to a person, and also how you can't escape it.

But the issue is indeed how you alter an institution that doesn't want to change, and how so. Societal bias is huge and unfortunately often difficult to separate from politics/media control, and political incentive is its own thread and then some.

Last edited by TheMeInTeam on Tue Aug 06, 2013 1:26 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________There is no "I" in team. There is no "we" either. There is a me.Dolan would like you to turn around and pick up that item on the ground.

Problem is with kids is protecting is so difficult. I personally at the tender age of 10 fooled my mum into getting me GTAIII. I didnt know what it meant, but guns fast cars and girls that made the car wobble didnt exactly scar me.

I appreciate the concern for kids, but shielding them too much from subtle messages I think is too much- what happens when they then need to deal with the full on issue having never been introduced to it? I by no means think exposure to some things is bad, but to be honest there's really more things I'd be worried about than the slapstick humour of spongebob

Serious_Much wrote:Problem is with kids is protecting is so difficult. I personally at the tender age of 10 fooled my mum into getting me GTAIII. I didnt know what it meant, but guns fast cars and girls that made the car wobble didnt exactly scar me.

I appreciate the concern for kids, but shielding them too much from subtle messages I think is too much- what happens when they then need to deal with the full on issue having never been introduced to it? I by no means think exposure to some things is bad, but to be honest there's really more things I'd be worried about than the slapstick humour of spongebob

I agree but at the same time all forms of censorship to children can see the same argument. Short of altering societal bias it almost doesn't matter, unless you expose them to things that empower them to directly harm others or witness actual physical harm.

Most children can separate fantasy from reality pretty darn early, earlier than they can even reason out long-term consequences for their actions. My nephews knew that getting chainsawed in the game wasn't like getting killed in real life, and knew that even far more basic tools are extremely dangerous. One of them even got very emotionally bent out of shape for a bit once he understood the reality of everyone dying eventually, but *still* separated that emotionally from things like dying in video games instantly.

Censorship isn't really the way IMO, I'm just pointing out that a *lot* of these shows send bad messages. The worst message, however, and the most common is how people react to and act in day-to-day life. A girl can watch a ninja superhero girl save the day for 10 years straight, and it will mean nothing compared to observed actual gender roles and outcomes among her friends, parents, and everyone else surrounding her in life. The message of fantasy vs reality to her is very clear in such a scenario, and the pretend show has no chance in terms of influence.

Censorship is in my opinion lazy parenting. Kids are going to come into contact with this stuff whether you like it or not, you can't stop that. You don't have to actively expose them to it, but what you can do is try to keep a healthy relationship with them consisting of good, open dialogue. Talk to them about the stuff they're exposed to, let them know your opinion and what you want to instill in them about it, make sure that when they're confused or confronted with something big, they'll want to talk to you and not hide away and shape their opinions away from your supervision. Censorship effectively just makes them want to not let their parents know when they come into contact with certain things.

1) It's not about you.2) If you try to make it about you, you'll sound ridiculous.

Steve Jobs:

Almost everything--all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure--these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.

bunnywink wrote:... Skare, you are doing an amazing job as a father.......

Ya. Sure sounds like it dude. Lucky little girl.

Imo, parenting and child rearing can be used an a great example of why bias is acceptable at times. Women make better care givers in general, hands down imo. However, with that said, I take the main brunt of child rearing in my marriage. My job is more than flexible and I make great money.

Now before I tell you how my wife and I have talked a lot about expanding my opportunities, let me tell you why her eventually staying home has only recently become a topic of discussion.

She stayed at home, for the first few and a half years. She's an excellent mother, more tender than I could ever be. Us three boys are blessed to have her in our lives more than we could ever imagine.

However, I got really tired of seeing her cry every night because our oldest is autistic. She wasn't unstable. She was however diagnosed with postpartum. This tore me apart. I had a decent job, an immaculate house (thanks to her), and all the love I could ever hope for.

With the exception of me being completely miserable. My wife is just so on top of things, loving me in ways I don't deserve, and the IDEAL example, of an truly nice person. Watching her cry every other night because she was afraid the world would bully him into suicide made me very internally spiteful.

Am trying to make this short........

So my job went downhill, I had a couple other offers, and we talked about want kind of environment we wanted for our future. So one day I walked past my bosses office, his bosses office, past the CEO's office, and straight into the owner's office. I turned in a 12 page report of misconduct, ethic violations, and issues border-lining legality. Lets just say if there is one conversation this particular business owner would have liked to NEVER have had....this was IT lol.

BTW, It was the complete truth and I stand by my word today.

So yeah, I went oooon leave, hence got fired, blah blah blah lol. I was worried though, I mean who likes losing a job? But we were pretty optimistic about the future.

The first few weeks I was home, it was great. I helped my wife immensely, and our marriage grew stronger. But, she got offered a part-time job down the street. She turned it down immediately because, well, we were researching local economies deciding if we wanted to relocate....daydreaming in other words lol.

But, as I thought, I realized maybe she should get out of the house for a little bit. I wasn't gonna decide what I wanted to do for a good few weeks, maybe a couple months.

Well, here's what happened. I'm not tender like a woman. That little autistic boy got talkin, he started listening, he made break throughs doctors said were impossible. Not only was I able to completely replace his Occupational Therapists, my wife and I began talking about intensive home schooling and its competitiveness to public/private options based on the results we were getting.

Again, speeding up....

She'll be at home next year. I can't get insurance doing what I'm doing, she's really enjoyed being away from home, but has decided she wants to be back home...for obvious reasons. Because of our marriage, she's conquered her sadness (for the most part) and we are both confident of this to be true, and feel very fortunate.

Because of our situation these past 2 years, I might actually become a business owner myself. I don't play well with others anyway, and this is what we wanted all along. If it doesn't work out though..........

I GOTTA GET OUTTA THIS HOUSE MAN! I just, I just don't see how you women tolerate this. My wife can go a whole day shopping, getting haircuts, and visiting relatives and enjoy EVERY frekin moment!!!!

Believe me when I say I DONT! I wake up every day and clock in. My house is like a jail man. It's, "Don't jump on the couch" "Don't hit your brother" "No, no,no" "Don't do that" "DO THAT NOW"...it's &%$#ing insane. My "man-mind" was not made for this.

Lol......I kid of course . "Jail"???...well a jail filled with a whole lotta hugs and kisses, and I wuv yous, and all the other things my father never did/said for me. I did what a "man" would do and clocked in with an apron on. My marriage got better, my son got better, and my wife gained a lot more "confidence" if you know what I mean. Well worth the looks and comments when I said I was a stay at home father who works part-time. F...T...W.

Anyways....

Moral of the story is from my experience, she's the better stay at home parent. Its because she's a woman. This stands true in most cases imo. I'd like to believe that God put us in each other's "normal" role as a parent because the way the world works is divine and meant to not be understood.

I didn't chime in here to say "Hey I'm a great father too", I chimed in to say,

"Discrimination is wrong, and so is ignoring the obvious."

I think women make better child care-givers.

Call me old fashioned if you want, but don't call me a bigot. I still open the door for my wife and send her flowers, and if this hair brained funeral home idea works out I might be rich too....but if it don't.....im tellin ya...ill be at McDonalds next year if I had too .

I don't think women are necessarily better at it. I guess I'd agree that statistically you probably see a lot more deadbeat dads then deadbeat moms, but there are some amazingly awesome dads out there too. It takes both parents, and I think a lot of it depends on the sex of the children too. My dad was an amazing guy. Really great father in the short time that we had with him around. I'm positive that had he lived longer I probably would have made some different choices and might not have done some of the worse things in my past. I needed somebody around to teach me how to be a man. My mother is an incredible women and parent, but she couldn't teach me how to be a man, because she isn't one.

Oh agree it can take both. I'd also say that some single parents do a better job than some couples.

What I was trying to exemplify is that, statistically you'll find the "super parent" more common in women than men.

I make a lot fathers look like morons. I'm a "super parent" and am in the upper percentile when considering men alone, however, there are several women that outshine me on a daily basis.

I don't believe that to be the case because of tradition, but because of genetics.

Don't make me rant about the "potty training" (actually my autistic son going poop). My conversation with his pediatrician ended with looking for a enema for children and just holding him down (its because of autism and hard to explain, AND he was 6 at the time).

My wife accomplished this in 4 days when she was off work after her operation....I didn't have this conversation with his doctor until after 3 months of trying EVERYTHING.

There are differences between men and women. They are not equal. Saying otherwise is

This is a very difficult for me to define succinctly or even remotely thoroughly. For me, it comes down to a feel . . . do I feel like someone is being unfairly pigeon-holed based solely on their gender (like women are better homemakers then men, or men are better businessmen then women)? Or, do I feel like someone is morally superior/inferior to another, based solely on their gender (like women are ditzes or men mainly think with places other than their brain)?

The idea that a woman is a better caretaker for the sole reason of her gender is a societal construct. We raise women to be better caregivers, no big surprise statistics show that too. It is inherently wrong to assume a person will be better at something because of their gender or ethnicity, and it is wrong to assume roles should be handed out based on either. Signaporean kids have better statistics for math achievements. Does this mean they are better at math? No, it means their education system focuses on this - just like our current education systems for women teach them they are supposed to stay at home, cook food, clean, and care for children, and get them started on all these aspects from early childhood toys. Boys are meanwhile given be an astronaut or build a ship legos.

When discussing gender issues, it is always best to go back to the concept: if society hadn't told me this, would I know it.

@Fex: It's true. When I was in high school and got to the grade where we started taking those classes, which I want to say was 10th grade, the girls were sent to home economics, where they learned to cook and sew, and what have you, and the boys were sent to wood shop, where they tried to teach us basic carpentry. Doesn't mean either side was particularly good at one or the other. I personally happen to be terrible with things like that. I built speakers that worked at one point, but aside from that the only notable thing I accomplished that semester was accidentally hot gluing a wooden plank to my hand. On the other hand I can cook up a storm. I would have loved to have learned how to bake instead, but that just wasn't the way it worked because it didn't match the societal standard. I would have requested to be placed in home ec, but I didn't because I probably would have gotten laughed at. Instead I learned something I couldn't care less about.

^ I totally disagree. Continuing to use myself as an example, I've cheated on a significant other once in my entire life. One time ever. And I did it because she had cheated on me the previous week, and I was angry and hurt and I thought it would make me feel better, and I wanted to hurt her just as badly as she hurt me. On the other hand I've been cheated on in almost every relationship I've been a part of, save maybe 2. We're all individuals when it comes to these things. We really are. I'd bet money that if you did a survey, and somehow managed to get all honest answers, and asked a control group of men if they'd ever made a decision based wholly on what they wanted sexually, despite any ramifications on any other part of their life, then asked the same number of women the same question that you'd get numbers that were comparable. The fact that men think with their junk is just a stereotype. I think the real difference is that the men that do regularly, have the kinds of personalities where they think it's funny to flaunt it, and at the same time the way our society works it's socially okay for them to do that, it makes them cool, or a stud, or whatever, that they can get so many women, while if a women who does the same thing flaunted it, she would be called a slu* or a who*, or what have you, and it would have very negative social connotations. It's really all based on societal standard. I don't think it has very much to do with the reality of the genders at all.

Last edited by PlasticandRage on Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:57 pm; edited 1 time in total

I think you are very mistaken in assuming that female sex drive is lower than male's. Again our society teaches women that they shouldn't be a "slut" - If you investigate open sex societies such as Thailand you will find that female sex drive is considered superior to males.

Again, we often fail to realize that a lot of our thoughts are based on societal subconscious implementation. I couldn't stand being a stay at home mom, I wasn't raised like that, so to me the idea that "women can endure the jail that is the home" is preposterous and the further assessment that there's a god-given role to my gender is rather puzzling and seems self justifying. Stop thinking in the conventions of your society and you start realizing things could be very different and a lot of what we consider "natural" is not, and has been brought about by societal influence and reinforced to the point muslim women are happy to wear burquas. If you then deduct that must mean women are better at covering themselves up and should be the ones to do it... :/

Edit: genetic? sorry, that's plain ignorance. There's no such rresearch in the human genome to result in such a cconclusion. Additionally,, a male-centricsport has absollutely nothing to do with the genetic capability of males to care for a home.

I will say on the topic that there is actually founding for men having stronger sex drives, at points in their lives. Women have a stronger sex drive at other parts in their lives. What is it, 18-26 for men, I think 28-34 for women? Something like that, it is when we are considered to be in our sexual prime generally that our sex drive is going at its strongest. And as you get older generally it gets weaker and weaker though not in all individuals.

I should also mention the concept of men thinking about sex every hour is not as it seems. First of all when taking in media females are generally sexualized so that's a given if you are watching a movie and for whatever reason a female character suddenly has a scene in her underwear having a pillow fight, you're going to think about sex.

Another thing is in their sleep men actually do think about sex every hour, it is to essentially constantly test your genitals. It's an evolutionary trait which is responsible for morning wood, to make sure your genitals are properly functioning so you can reproduce.

EDIT: I think animal is trying to say, "Don't demonize women with large breasts, don't demonize large men with long beards" essentially. Some people are born stereotypes and it just happens to be who they are. Some women are born with large breasts, some men are born with giant dongs.

I very much disagree. Many of the men I know are not deserving of those stereotypes.

Again MANY.

I cant tell you the difference in statements at almost every funeral home I work at when a beautiful woman is on the embalming table and working with male embalmers as opposed to when I'm working with female embalmers and there is an attractive man on the table.

Its night and day man....makes me sick to my stomach sometimes.

If you guys are really saying that men do not have more problems controlling their sex drives, then look at **** statistics.

I was simply representing the situatation for what it is. It is a fantasy, and a childrens cartoon, but that is the reasoning. It is not a petty justification, but a logical, step by step analysis.

Could they have had a different weakness? of course they could have. but why should they? to avoid potentially teaching children the "wrong message?" The "wrong message" is a subjective concept, and these people are not (nor should they) be obligated to consider your feeling on the matter in a show not made with you as the intended audience. To further my point, the "wrong message" can be taken from anything, and its all in the interpretation, no matter the creators intent.

The solution then, is to teach people (children in this case) how to think, so they may take away lessons benificial to them and ignore the rest, not to attack the show. It cannot harm (or help)anyone except through how its interpreted and children can be taught how to interpret things to their advantage.

Its not "little girls should be interested in romance and little boys shouldn't" its "these little girls are interested in romance and these little boys aren't, which the little girls then turned to their advantage to save their world"

The lesson you take from that, or teach your child based on that, is entirely up to you.

For the record, most every interaction is a social construct. You cannot tell me honestly that such constructs are bad. Society tells me that killing people for personal gain is wrong. if they did not, how would i know?

it would be much easier to just stab some dude and take his stuff than to go work for hours every day to get my own. If i were not told this was wrong, and then provided with incentives to do things the hard way by society, why would I do anything else?

the "roles" are a construct, but they were a vital construct for thousands of years, and so the biological tendancies have shifted to match. (ie its both genetic and a social construct) they have not been non essential for nearly so long, and indeed there are places in the world where they are still essential, and so one cannot reasonably expect the masses to change their perspective so readily. The tendancy (and thus its impact on society) will be there for a good long while yet.

The "in work daycare" type stuff is a matter of pragmatism, not equality. if the woman is more efficent than the man who would "traditionally" have the spot, and has a child, she needs somewhere to keep her child while she works. When this is not 1 woman, but hundreds or thousands, it is only practical to provide the service oneself (and either make them pay to boost profits or keep it free to earn a reputation and attract better workers.) It has nothing to do with equality from a buisness standpoint, it is simply better for the company.

Last edited by Forum Pirate on Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:22 am; edited 1 time in total

_________________

Your rules are yoursMy honor is mine.Perspective is everything. We are Exiles, and our home is Painted with the blood of trespassers.

Animaaal wrote:Oh I'm not mistaken, I know how powerful a woman's sex drive can be. I'm just saying a man's sex drive can borderline insanity more often than women.

My thoughts are not based on what society tells me.

Also, its not ignorant. Men and women have genetic differences proven to be true.

I've been doing this for 2 years and when I think about the next 15 I cringe. When my wife thinks about it she lights up.

I wish strong women would stop trying to demonize women that want to be not so strong. And also, I wish strong men would do the same for not so strong men.

Imo, there's a lot less wrong with "old fashioned" than "new fashioned".

Your "more often than" is unprovable assumption

It is ignorant to say there is a female childcaring gene. It's actually ridiculous.

Your personal experiences are anecdotal evidence and only prove that society has raised you one way and her another. Your application of that to then all women must be x and all men must be y is sexist, narrow minded and unhelpful to understanding the real gender differences that do not have anything to do with being able to go get a haircut and enjoy it.

Who is trying to demonize anyone? Have I said women should not stay at home? Why would anyone say a stay at home mom is not strong? You are revealing your own bias and asserting sexist remarks without any research but your own patriarchally influence dview of the world.

Your further attempts to claim that males are these creatures who cannot contain their sex drive is very sexist and frankly unwelcome, it belongs in repressive muslim societies where it's a given men can't help but **** a woman so they can't be allowed to leave the house without company. Sorry males have as much of a drive as females. Society tells females to repress it.

Imo, there's less wrong with well educated and researched than with we've always done it this way so it can't be wrong.

Fex I should mention that the situation with backwards gender views in the east is related to political choices rather than religious ones, seventy years ago Muslim cultures were much better towards women, however due to political changes things have gone differently over time. It is because of their politics not their Religious views.